RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (42) < ... 37 38 39 40 41 [42] >   
  Topic: MrIntelligentDesign, Edgar Postrado's new Intelligent Design< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
NoName



Posts: 2721
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 09 2015,13:58   

Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 09 2015,13:54)
[quote=EmperorZelos,Nov. 09 2015,05:02][quote=MrIntelligentDesign,Nov. 09 2015,00:08][quote=k.e..,Nov. 08 2015,20:14][quote=MrIntelligentDesign,Nov. 09 2015,03:48] [quote=NoName,Nov. 08 2015,06:49]  
Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 07 2015,17:04)
       
Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 07 2015,08:17)
         
Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 06 2015,20:36)
           
Quote (NoName @ Nov. 06 2015,11:25)
!

Completely incoherent nonsense Edgar. A late night in front of a bottle perhaps? Too much overproof sake? Big headache the next morning?

I'm perfectly fine...

HAHAHAHA! Perfectly fine my arse! You are a crank, delusional, incoherent and probably narcissistic too.

I have science as evidences of my six science books. IF YOU COULD provide an alternative replacement for my new and universal intelligence, then, maybe you are right.

But you have nothing to offer, thus, you are nothing!

You know those signs at amusement parks -- must be this tall to enter/ride?
Your nonsense doesn't rise to the level where a replacement is required or called for.
It's too silly to be considered.

You have a useless categorization scheme that falls to the fact that it produces both false negatives and false positives.
You are utterly incapable of providing even a hint of a suggestion of an intimation of a guess at what actual difference your notions would make were they to be adopted.
Why bother replacing your swill?  Literally speaking, nothing is better.  
You present no challenge at all to the current understanding of intelligence, no matter how construed.
Even Gary has better stuff than you do, and his stuff is an absolute failure.
Yours is a complete loss.
Thus, you lose.  Same as it ever was.

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1047
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 09 2015,14:22   

Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 09 2015,12:54)
[quote=EmperorZelos,Nov. 09 2015,05:02][quote=MrIntelligentDesign,Nov. 09 2015,00:08][quote=k.e..,Nov. 08 2015,20:14][quote=MrIntelligentDesign,Nov. 09 2015,03:48] [quote=NoName,Nov. 08 2015,06:49]  
Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 07 2015,17:04)
       
Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 07 2015,08:17)
         
Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 06 2015,20:36)
           
Quote (NoName @ Nov. 06 2015,11:25)
!

Completely incoherent nonsense Edgar. A late night in front of a bottle perhaps? Too much overproof sake? Big headache the next morning?

I'm perfectly fine...

HAHAHAHA! Perfectly fine my arse! You are a crank, delusional, incoherent and probably narcissistic too.

I have science as evidences of my six science books. IF YOU COULD provide an alternative replacement for my new and universal intelligence, then, maybe you are right.

But you have nothing to offer, thus, you are nothing!

Does it ever occur to you that you need at least a bare minimum of credibility for your insults to have any bite?

They only work for those with credibility in the vicinity of yours, to UDites and abysmal cretins like yourself.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
EmperorZelos



Posts: 81
Joined: Oct. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,00:23   

Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 09 2015,12:54)
I have science as evidences of my six science books. IF YOU COULD provide an alternative replacement for my new and universal intelligence, then, maybe you are right.

But you have nothing to offer, thus, you are nothing!

You have 6 books that are shitty and poorly written but no science. Again you need peer review for it to be qualified as science. Otherwise you're on the same league as new agers.

I don't have to provide any alternative to demonstrate that your shit turd of an idea is just that, shit.

  
MrIntelligentDesign



Posts: 405
Joined: Sep. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,04:06   

Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 10 2015,00:23)
Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 09 2015,12:54)
I have science as evidences of my six science books. IF YOU COULD provide an alternative replacement for my new and universal intelligence, then, maybe you are right.

But you have nothing to offer, thus, you are nothing!

You have 6 books that are shitty and poorly written but no science. Again you need peer review for it to be qualified as science. Otherwise you're on the same league as new agers.

I don't have to provide any alternative to demonstrate that your shit turd of an idea is just that, shit.

LOL!!!

As Graham Gould in YouTube had said to you that you don't need peer-reviews if the peer-reviewers were incompetent!

YOU WERE BLOCKED by him since you are so stupid to know his post against you!

Yes, I agreed that we need to appeal to authority, aka, peer-reviewers, but when those reviewers were dumb, we should just stick to the standard of science!

YOU LOST and HAD NOTHING TO OFFER!

LOL!

  
EmperorZelos



Posts: 81
Joined: Oct. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,04:32   

Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 10 2015,04:06)
LOL!!!

As Graham Gould in YouTube had said to you that you don't need peer-reviews if the peer-reviewers were incompetent!

YOU WERE BLOCKED by him since you are so stupid to know his post against you!

Yes, I agreed that we need to appeal to authority, aka, peer-reviewers, but when those reviewers were dumb, we should just stick to the standard of science!

YOU LOST and HAD NOTHING TO OFFER!

LOL!

To do science you need to peer review, it is as simple as that, doing pseudoscience you don't need it because pseudoscience is all about looking like science, but not engage the scientific community in their manner.

And he blocked me? What a pathetic loser he must be then to do that when nothing but responding to his idiocy has been done. It shows how weak his position is if he must block people whom demonstrates he is an idiot.

First of, peer review is not appeal to authority it is a process at which flawed methodology and reasoning is eliminated, garantuing that scientists whom read it know at least that what has come through holds up to a certain standard (not the conclusion that is).

Secondly, peer review process IS STANDARD SCIENCE.

I don't need to understand all your work to know it's shit because it's incoherent.

  
MrIntelligentDesign



Posts: 405
Joined: Sep. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,04:53   

Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 10 2015,04:32)
Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 10 2015,04:06)
LOL!!!

As Graham Gould in YouTube had said to you that you don't need peer-reviews if the peer-reviewers were incompetent!

YOU WERE BLOCKED by him since you are so stupid to know his post against you!

Yes, I agreed that we need to appeal to authority, aka, peer-reviewers, but when those reviewers were dumb, we should just stick to the standard of science!

YOU LOST and HAD NOTHING TO OFFER!

LOL!

To do science you need to peer review, it is as simple as that, doing pseudoscience you don't need it because pseudoscience is all about looking like science, but not engage the scientific community in their manner.

And he blocked me? What a pathetic loser he must be then to do that when nothing but responding to his idiocy has been done. It shows how weak his position is if he must block people whom demonstrates he is an idiot.

First of, peer review is not appeal to authority it is a process at which flawed methodology and reasoning is eliminated, garantuing that scientists whom read it know at least that what has come through holds up to a certain standard (not the conclusion that is).

Secondly, peer review process IS STANDARD SCIENCE.

I don't need to understand all your work to know it's shit because it's incoherent.

Peer-review is appeal to authority since you will never read and accept (as you believed and accepted) science articles OUTSIDE the peer-preview system...

But that is circular..ToE reviewers reviewed and passed articles for ToE?? That is circular!!

Thus, I don't care if appealing to authority is bad. I HAVE THE BEST SCIENCE and I  am NOT afraid to fight squarely! TAKE NOTE FOR THAT! I was scholar and I received two scholarships when I was in univ ..thus, I am right!

I think it is good to appeal to the authorities...BUT..

If those reviewers/authorities were incompetent and worst than an ordinary student in science, it is better to discard them..

Thus, you are wrong and totally wrong!

Thus, it is good for you to be blocked since you don't use your scientific mind!

  
dazz



Posts: 247
Joined: Mar. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,04:57   

Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 10 2015,11:32)
Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 10 2015,04:06)
LOL!!!

As Graham Gould in YouTube had said to you that you don't need peer-reviews if the peer-reviewers were incompetent!

YOU WERE BLOCKED by him since you are so stupid to know his post against you!

Yes, I agreed that we need to appeal to authority, aka, peer-reviewers, but when those reviewers were dumb, we should just stick to the standard of science!

YOU LOST and HAD NOTHING TO OFFER!

LOL!

To do science you need to peer review, it is as simple as that, doing pseudoscience you don't need it because pseudoscience is all about looking like science, but not engage the scientific community in their manner.

And he blocked me? What a pathetic loser he must be then to do that when nothing but responding to his idiocy has been done. It shows how weak his position is if he must block people whom demonstrates he is an idiot.

First of, peer review is not appeal to authority it is a process at which flawed methodology and reasoning is eliminated, garantuing that scientists whom read it know at least that what has come through holds up to a certain standard (not the conclusion that is).

Secondly, peer review process IS STANDARD SCIENCE.

I don't need to understand all your work to know it's shit because it's incoherent.

Only that Postardo's shit doesn't even look like science, it doesn't even raise to the level of pseudoscience

  
EmperorZelos



Posts: 81
Joined: Oct. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,05:03   

Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 10 2015,04:53)
Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 10 2015,04:32)

To do science you need to peer review, it is as simple as that, doing pseudoscience you don't need it because pseudoscience is all about looking like science, but not engage the scientific community in their manner.

And he blocked me? What a pathetic loser he must be then to do that when nothing but responding to his idiocy has been done. It shows how weak his position is if he must block people whom demonstrates he is an idiot.

First of, peer review is not appeal to authority it is a process at which flawed methodology and reasoning is eliminated, garantuing that scientists whom read it know at least that what has come through holds up to a certain standard (not the conclusion that is).

Secondly, peer review process IS STANDARD SCIENCE.

I don't need to understand all your work to know it's shit because it's incoherent.

Peer-review is appeal to authority since you will never read and accept (as you believed and accepted) science articles OUTSIDE the peer-preview system...

But that is circular..ToE reviewers reviewed and passed articles for ToE?? That is circular!!

Thus, I don't care if appealing to authority is bad. I HAVE THE BEST SCIENCE and I  am NOT afraid to fight squarely! TAKE NOTE FOR THAT! I was scholar and I received two scholarships when I was in univ ..thus, I am right!

I think it is good to appeal to the authorities...BUT..

If those reviewers/authorities were incompetent and worst than an ordinary student in science, it is better to discard them..

Thus, you are wrong and totally wrong!

Thus, it is good for you to be blocked since you don't use your scientific mind!

If it isn't peer reviewed it isn't a science article, I can read your junk and get a laugh out of it and....I HAVE!

That is not circular because they are not Theory of Evolution reviewers but scientists reviewing work.

You have no science because if you did, you'd cite your peer reviewed publication and not just cry foul, make excuses and tell people to buy your book you charlatan.

Quote
I  am NOT afraid to fight squarely! TAKE NOTE FOR THAT!

THEN FUCKING DO IT! GET IT INTO PEER REVIEWED ARTICLES AND FIGHT FOR IT LIKE A REAL MAN AND HOW YOU DO IN SCIENCE!

Quote
I was scholar and I received two scholarships when I was in univ ..thus, I am right!

Unless you provide evidence of this I don't believe you, you've demonstrated to be an idiot.

Quote
If those reviewers/authorities were incompetent and worst than an ordinary student in science, it is better to discard them

Except they aren't, they have masters degrees at bare minimum.

Quote
Thus, it is good for you to be blocked since you don't use your scientific mind!

Is that all you're gonna do now, start blocking people because your position is so patheticly weak?

  
EmperorZelos



Posts: 81
Joined: Oct. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,05:04   

Quote (dazz @ Nov. 10 2015,04:57)
Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 10 2015,11:32)
Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 10 2015,04:06)
LOL!!!

As Graham Gould in YouTube had said to you that you don't need peer-reviews if the peer-reviewers were incompetent!

YOU WERE BLOCKED by him since you are so stupid to know his post against you!

Yes, I agreed that we need to appeal to authority, aka, peer-reviewers, but when those reviewers were dumb, we should just stick to the standard of science!

YOU LOST and HAD NOTHING TO OFFER!

LOL!

To do science you need to peer review, it is as simple as that, doing pseudoscience you don't need it because pseudoscience is all about looking like science, but not engage the scientific community in their manner.

And he blocked me? What a pathetic loser he must be then to do that when nothing but responding to his idiocy has been done. It shows how weak his position is if he must block people whom demonstrates he is an idiot.

First of, peer review is not appeal to authority it is a process at which flawed methodology and reasoning is eliminated, garantuing that scientists whom read it know at least that what has come through holds up to a certain standard (not the conclusion that is).

Secondly, peer review process IS STANDARD SCIENCE.

I don't need to understand all your work to know it's shit because it's incoherent.

Only that Postardo's shit doesn't even look like science, it doesn't even raise to the level of pseudoscience

Correct, I was just pointing to that people can look like science but exclude important parts like that.

  
MrIntelligentDesign



Posts: 405
Joined: Sep. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,06:13   

Quote (Glen Davidson @ Nov. 09 2015,14:22)
[quote=MrIntelligentDesign,Nov. 09 2015,12:54][quote=EmperorZelos,Nov. 09 2015,05:02][quote=MrIntelligentDesign,Nov. 09 2015,00:08][quote=k.e..,Nov. 08 2015,20:14][quote=MrIntelligentDesign,Nov. 09 2015,03:48]
Quote (NoName @ Nov. 08 2015,06:49)
 
Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 07 2015,17:04)
       
Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 07 2015,08:17)
         
Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 06 2015,20:36)
           
Quote (NoName @ Nov. 06 2015,11:25)
!

Completely incoherent nonsense Edgar. A late night in front of a bottle perhaps? Too much overproof sake? Big headache the next morning?

I'm perfectly fine...

HAHAHAHA! Perfectly fine my arse! You are a crank, delusional, incoherent and probably narcissistic too.

I have science as evidences of my six science books. IF YOU COULD provide an alternative replacement for my new and universal intelligence, then, maybe you are right.

But you have nothing to offer, thus, you are nothing!

Does it ever occur to you that you need at least a bare minimum of credibility for your insults to have any bite?

They only work for those with credibility in the vicinity of yours, to UDites and abysmal cretins like yourself.

Glen Davidson

I have science, the best of it,  and I have new discoveries..

Since you are not supporting me, then, you are against me...

BUT where is your science?

  
MrIntelligentDesign



Posts: 405
Joined: Sep. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,06:15   

Quote (dazz @ Nov. 10 2015,04:57)
Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 10 2015,11:32)
Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 10 2015,04:06)
LOL!!!

As Graham Gould in YouTube had said to you that you don't need peer-reviews if the peer-reviewers were incompetent!

YOU WERE BLOCKED by him since you are so stupid to know his post against you!

Yes, I agreed that we need to appeal to authority, aka, peer-reviewers, but when those reviewers were dumb, we should just stick to the standard of science!

YOU LOST and HAD NOTHING TO OFFER!

LOL!

To do science you need to peer review, it is as simple as that, doing pseudoscience you don't need it because pseudoscience is all about looking like science, but not engage the scientific community in their manner.

And he blocked me? What a pathetic loser he must be then to do that when nothing but responding to his idiocy has been done. It shows how weak his position is if he must block people whom demonstrates he is an idiot.

First of, peer review is not appeal to authority it is a process at which flawed methodology and reasoning is eliminated, garantuing that scientists whom read it know at least that what has come through holds up to a certain standard (not the conclusion that is).

Secondly, peer review process IS STANDARD SCIENCE.

I don't need to understand all your work to know it's shit because it's incoherent.

Only that Postardo's shit doesn't even look like science, it doesn't even raise to the level of pseudoscience

REMEMBER that you don't know the correct categorization process in science since you did not even know the diff bet instinct to intelligence..

  
MrIntelligentDesign



Posts: 405
Joined: Sep. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,06:18   

Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 10 2015,05:03)
Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 10 2015,04:53)
Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 10 2015,04:32)

To do science you need to peer review, it is as simple as that, doing pseudoscience you don't need it because pseudoscience is all about looking like science, but not engage the scientific community in their manner.

And he blocked me? What a pathetic loser he must be then to do that when nothing but responding to his idiocy has been done. It shows how weak his position is if he must block people whom demonstrates he is an idiot.

First of, peer review is not appeal to authority it is a process at which flawed methodology and reasoning is eliminated, garantuing that scientists whom read it know at least that what has come through holds up to a certain standard (not the conclusion that is).

Secondly, peer review process IS STANDARD SCIENCE.

I don't need to understand all your work to know it's shit because it's incoherent.

Peer-review is appeal to authority since you will never read and accept (as you believed and accepted) science articles OUTSIDE the peer-preview system...

But that is circular..ToE reviewers reviewed and passed articles for ToE?? That is circular!!

Thus, I don't care if appealing to authority is bad. I HAVE THE BEST SCIENCE and I  am NOT afraid to fight squarely! TAKE NOTE FOR THAT! I was scholar and I received two scholarships when I was in univ ..thus, I am right!

I think it is good to appeal to the authorities...BUT..

If those reviewers/authorities were incompetent and worst than an ordinary student in science, it is better to discard them..

Thus, you are wrong and totally wrong!

Thus, it is good for you to be blocked since you don't use your scientific mind!

If it isn't peer reviewed it isn't a science article, I can read your junk and get a laugh out of it and....I HAVE!

That is not circular because they are not Theory of Evolution reviewers but scientists reviewing work.

You have no science because if you did, you'd cite your peer reviewed publication and not just cry foul, make excuses and tell people to buy your book you charlatan.

Quote
I  am NOT afraid to fight squarely! TAKE NOTE FOR THAT!

THEN FUCKING DO IT! GET IT INTO PEER REVIEWED ARTICLES AND FIGHT FOR IT LIKE A REAL MAN AND HOW YOU DO IN SCIENCE!

Quote
I was scholar and I received two scholarships when I was in univ ..thus, I am right!

Unless you provide evidence of this I don't believe you, you've demonstrated to be an idiot.

Quote
If those reviewers/authorities were incompetent and worst than an ordinary student in science, it is better to discard them

Except they aren't, they have masters degrees at bare minimum.

Quote
Thus, it is good for you to be blocked since you don't use your scientific mind!

Is that all you're gonna do now, start blocking people because your position is so patheticly weak?

LOL!!!

APPEALING TO AUTHORITY!! even though the authorities were dumb and incompetent!!

LOL!!

  
NoName



Posts: 2721
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,06:38   

Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 10 2015,07:13)
...
I have science, the best of it,  and I have new discoveries..

Since you are not supporting me, then, you are against me...

BUT where is your science?

Why, no, no you don't.
Based on what you have presented here, you have no science at all.  Tossing the word around doesn't get you closer to 'having science'.
You have an ill-conceived, failed, attempt at a categorization scheme.
Categorization schemes have zero explanatory power.
Categorizations schemes that produce both false positives and false negatives, which is to say, fail to correctly categorize, are useless.
What you have is utterly useless.
There is no need to provide a replacement for that which is useless.

Science is all around you.  Given how very confused you are, it is no surprise you fail to recognize it.

Of course we don't support you.  Based on the evidence, no one supports you.
You have nothing worthy of support.

You actively flee any and all opportunities to explain what difference your "new discoveries" make.  You are only willing to talk about how important they are.
Things that make no difference, that fail to even imply changes in how science is done, that fail to suggest new research opportunities, that fail to provide an increase in explanatory power, are useless.

  
NoName



Posts: 2721
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,06:41   

Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 10 2015,07:15)
...
REMEMBER that you don't know the correct categorization process in science since you did not even know the diff bet instinct to intelligence..

We prefer not to remember lies.
Your 'categorization' "method" fails.
Categorization as such has no explanatory power.
You have nothing beyond a failed categorization scheme.

But worst, the part that makes your silly command dishonest, is that reference materials were provided earlier in this thread that showed how and why modern science distinguishes instinct and intelligence along a continuum across which the two tend to overlap for a considerable portion of the range.

You, on the other hand, cannot define either 'instinct' or 'intelligence'.

You lose, same as it ever was.

  
NoName



Posts: 2721
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,06:44   

Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 10 2015,07:18)
...

APPEALING TO AUTHORITY!! even though the authorities were dumb and incompetent!!

LOL!!

Looks like we need to add "appeal to authority" to the list of logical fallacies Edgar simply does not understand.

Hardly surprising, given that he considers himself an authority, yet remains incoherent and confused on every topic he raises.

Laughable given that he flees from opportunities to confront and grapple with the serious issues raised against his silly little notions.

  
EmperorZelos



Posts: 81
Joined: Oct. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,08:26   

Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 10 2015,06:18)
LOL!!!

APPEALING TO AUTHORITY!! even though the authorities were dumb and incompetent!!

LOL!!

You don't know what appeal to authority fuckign means.

How do you know they were dumb and incompetent? Being those does not mean disagreeing with you. I bet they have more credentials, more work done, more experience, more EVERYTHING than you when it comes to mental capacity and functionality.

  
EmperorZelos



Posts: 81
Joined: Oct. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,08:34   

Mr Poe, if you want to be taken seriously why don't you stop being a coward that makes up excuses, and instead grow a fucking pair, get a spine, man up and actually stand by your own words. Ready to fight, then send it to a proper journal so it can become proper scientific work.

Unless you know it is crap at which making excuses is the only way out to preserve your fragile ego.

  
jeffox



Posts: 671
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2015,12:15   

Quote
Since you are not supporting me, then, you are against me...


Extremist false dichotomy.

Science isn't for or against anybody.  Science is about gathering evidence (empiricism) and making logical conclusions based on that evidence.  There's even a method for that . . . .

I've taken a long look at this thread; and I would have to say that MrIntelligentDesign hasn't done any science, and certainly hasn't presented any in this forum.

  
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 12 2015,08:59   

I can only admire you all for your stamina and endurance on this useless thread. I don't know if  I should say "keep up the good work" but if you think it is deserved, you're welcome. No insult intended, just a loose lip.

Gotta write something sometimes.


ETA: smiley substitute.
+ a typo.

Edited by Quack on Nov. 15 2015,08:11

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
k.e..



Posts: 3898
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 12 2015,09:26   

Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 10 2015,14:18)
Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 10 2015,05:03)
 
Quote (MrIntelligentDesign @ Nov. 10 2015,04:53)
 
Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 10 2015,04:32)

To do science you need to peer review, it is as simple as that, doing pseudoscience you don't need it because pseudoscience is all about looking like science, but not engage the scientific community in their manner.

And he blocked me? What a pathetic loser he must be then to do that when nothing but responding to his idiocy has been done. It shows how weak his position is if he must block people whom demonstrates he is an idiot.

First of, peer review is not appeal to authority it is a process at which flawed methodology and reasoning is eliminated, garantuing that scientists whom read it know at least that what has come through holds up to a certain standard (not the conclusion that is).

Secondly, peer review process IS STANDARD SCIENCE.

I don't need to understand all your work to know it's shit because it's incoherent.

Peer-review is appeal to authority since you will never read and accept (as you believed and accepted) science articles OUTSIDE the peer-preview system...

But that is circular..ToE reviewers reviewed and passed articles for ToE?? That is circular!!

Thus, I don't care if appealing to authority is bad. I HAVE THE BEST SCIENCE and I  am NOT afraid to fight squarely! TAKE NOTE FOR THAT! I was scholar and I received two scholarships when I was in univ ..thus, I am right!

I think it is good to appeal to the authorities...BUT..

If those reviewers/authorities were incompetent and worst than an ordinary student in science, it is better to discard them..

Thus, you are wrong and totally wrong!

Thus, it is good for you to be blocked since you don't use your scientific mind!

If it isn't peer reviewed it isn't a science article, I can read your junk and get a laugh out of it and....I HAVE!

That is not circular because they are not Theory of Evolution reviewers but scientists reviewing work.

You have no science because if you did, you'd cite your peer reviewed publication and not just cry foul, make excuses and tell people to buy your book you charlatan.

 
Quote
I  am NOT afraid to fight squarely! TAKE NOTE FOR THAT!

THEN FUCKING DO IT! GET IT INTO PEER REVIEWED ARTICLES AND FIGHT FOR IT LIKE A REAL MAN AND HOW YOU DO IN SCIENCE!

 
Quote
I was scholar and I received two scholarships when I was in univ ..thus, I am right!

Unless you provide evidence of this I don't believe you, you've demonstrated to be an idiot.

 
Quote
If those reviewers/authorities were incompetent and worst than an ordinary student in science, it is better to discard them

Except they aren't, they have masters degrees at bare minimum.

 
Quote
Thus, it is good for you to be blocked since you don't use your scientific mind!

Is that all you're gonna do now, start blocking people because your position is so patheticly weak?

LOL!!!

APPEALING TO AUTHORITY!! even though the authorities were dumb and incompetent!!

LOL!!

Yawn, says one extremely stupid, totally incompetent shit stain.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
EmperorZelos



Posts: 81
Joined: Oct. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 14 2015,08:16   

Notice the calm when the crank runs away~

  
ChemiCat



Posts: 458
Joined: Nov. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 14 2015,11:02   

Quote
Notice the calm when the crank runs away~


Perhaps the home has withdrawn his internet privileges for some misdemeanour.

  
EmperorZelos



Posts: 81
Joined: Oct. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 18 2015,09:13   

I do believe this is Edgars way to finally realize he is delusional and not face it.

  
  1252 replies since Sep. 30 2015,06:36 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (42) < ... 37 38 39 40 41 [42] >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]